Going by the childish naming of the project, it doesn't inspire confidence in the professionalism of the author going forward, and neither will it help with getting it installed on corporate networks.
I'm all for vulgar wit but this isn't that (yes I'm aware of the -tty convention) & just reinforces the cliche of tech skills inversely proportional to social ones
> and neither will it help with getting it installed on corporate networks
This might not be something the author cares about. Compliance with corporate policies is certainly not something I've prioritized when giving away open source software for free.
Given the memory-unsafe vice signaling, maybe this can become the official terminal of Fox News and the Department of War.
I assure you, this is a very professionally made product:
- we have 5,000 tests covering all aspects of terminal behavior
- we have address sanitizer and ub sanitizer runs of these tests
- we also have regular fuzzing!
- we even monitor code coverage
This is definitely a top 0.1% GitHub project in terms of development approach.
> and neither will it help with getting it installed on corporate networks.
I'm fine with it.
> This is definitely a top 0.1% GitHub project in terms of development approach.
Shitty is almost 100% generated by AI, tests and all. Is that really what you see as the epitome of development? Enough that you self rank in top 0.3%?
How much of it was written by AI?
If we are talking about the process of direct code production according to a given specification, then 100%.
Lmao "professional"
lol fuck this guy, the name and branding are awesome dude
[flagged]
> The moronic naming immediately undermines that claim.
It's quite obvious to me that professionalism in product manufacturing correlates very weakly with naming :) Proof me wrong.
Nothing else on any market called “shitty” that I’ve ever seen, and if I had, I would avoid it.
Any sales or marketing person will gladly tell you how bad an idea it is to use this name. “Shitty” is slang for “terrible quality”, for one.
Given git is all over the corporate world, I say this is less of an issue than you make it out to be.
He took zutty (GPL licensed), shitted some claude on it, then released it MIT. A license violation, but not like it matters, since it will end up in the same heap as every other bozo's vibeslop. It is aptly named.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C10&q=%22...
Yes, see also gimp, thefuck and other equally depressing juvenile names. I'm aware of precedence.
It's partly frustrating because the laziness of the naming presumably doesn't actually reflect the effort that has gone into the project.
Why did you make this comment? It's completely off topic.
Your appeals to authority do not apply when the author is clearly telling you not to use it for that. We're well past the point where this kind of software eventually ends up under corporate use policy or any policy at all.
The name screams for attention, so of course it's on topic. I made no appeal to authority, just maturity.
They aren't asking for money or literally anything from you, it's just someone's project with a silly name.
They're asking us to engage and try it, that's what ShowHN is.